project.After students became comfortable with using some of the analysis tools, listed in Figure 1 andshown in Figure 2, they were challenged to develop their own modelling tool for use in asupersonic nozzle design project. A survey of student perspectives on the various modellingtools developed by the students was used as an evaluation tool to help determine the mosteffective platforms for future projects and to expose students to a variety of analysis tools.Figure 1: Web Site with sample programs for evaluating thermodynamic systems of equationsFigure 2: Samples of web page platform for thermodynamic systems (supersonic nozzle and ICengine)Project AssignmentFor many years, in an advanced undergraduate thermodynamics course, students have been
EngineeringAbstractEngineering students are often given quantitative problems as homework. Problem solvingprovides students opportunities to retrieve knowledge, apply and adjust conceptualunderstanding, and build analytical skills. Because increased motivation has been shown toproduce better learning outcomes [1] - [3], it makes sense to tailor problems to motivate students.Intuitively, adding contextual elements, such as background information, narrative, images, andlocal references, to problems may be one way of motivating students, but investigation in thisarea has been limited [8] - [10]. Therefore, this study surveyed students to gauge theirperceptions of fundamentally identical problems presented either with or without significantcontextual elements. The primary
determine which studentsare more likely to persist in engineering or leave the engineering degree program.IntroductionIn the nation, the engineering retention rate is consistently reported to be below the nationalaverage for higher education retention at around 50 percent [1] - [6]. This low retention numberis placing a growing demand on the higher education system to keep and produce more engineers[7] - [9]. There are numerous reasons students leave engineering that range from student issues toinstitutional issues, but one of the leading causes has been attributed to the coursework thatengineering students are required to take early on in their program [3], [10] - [12]. These earlycourses include a series of math courses typically made up of 2 or
and challenge exclusionary thoughts andpractices” (p. 46). In their study on the effects of problem-oriented educational strategies onincreasing the student diversity among community college students, Noravian and Irvine (2014)found that moving from well-structured to ill-structured problem solving is beneficial to studentsand suggested the restructure of engineering education “so that students experience early in theirtraining what engineers do” (p. 294). As stated by King (2011), the low number of people ofcolor and women in engineering can be attributed to the highly quantitative focus and “the lackof evidence of social impact of engineering in the early engineering curriculum” (p. 1).In another effort, Knight et al. (2012) argued for the
such ashift can be problematic. Instructor assessment of student learning and student feedback throughend-of-course evaluations will be presented in this paper, as well as recommendations for futureinstructors wishing to apply similar changes.IntroductionMost universities offer courses that fall into one of the three following formats: first, a coursethat meets 3-times a week for 50-55 minutes (MWF); second, a course that meets twice a weekfor 75-80 minutes (TR); or lastly a course that meets once a week. The United States MilitaryAcademy does not offer courses that directly fall into these common formats, but rather into twocategories: a 40 lesson course with 55 minute duration lectures that occur on “Day 1” or a 30lesson course with 75
techniciansprograms [1]–[3].In its five-year history, KS has also provided technical assistance for developing and submittingproposals to NSF but has engaged 2-year HSIs exclusively. Prior to proposal development, KSfacilitates a STEM self-assessment and strengths/gap heatmap discussion with a cross-departmental STEM team at each participating college [4] [5]. KS then facilitates the 2-year HSISTEM team in developing a STEM plan and prioritized research concepts that align with theCollege Strategy, leverage STEM strengths, and address STEM gaps. This approach by KS hasgenerated a portfolio of potential research funding opportunities for STEM improvements at each2-year HSI prior to proposal development.The approach for the HSI ATE Hub is a 2-step intervention
, using structured casestudy method, the study selects and analyses four typical cases conducted within Chinesecomputing education system, and subsequently extracts two paths named integrated path, andspecialized path for sustainable development of computing education. Differentcharacteristics of computing education models have been outlined and summarized as fourtypical paths which are underlying computing education. The concept of computingeducation is consequently refined and suggestions are put forward for various hierarchies likegovernment, university, and industry, to effectively improve the quality of talent cultivation incomputing education in China.1 IntroductionThe development of technology and society sparked reform and transformation
proponentsof this initiative. Much has been learned from the experiences of the past – and these hard-learned experiences should guide the preparation of future editions of the CEBOK. A relevantquotation (from Adlai E. Stevenson) comes to mind: “We can chart our future clearly and wiselyonly when we know the path which has led to the present.”As the CEBOK has evolved, numerous papers have been published discussing various aspects ofits three different editions. A new paper titled “The Role of the Civil Engineering Body ofKnowledge in ASCE’s Raise the Bar Effort” is also being published and presented at the 2019ASEE Annual Conference [1].Planting the Seeds (1995-2001)Although the origins of maintaining a current and relevant engineering education
billion smartphones in the world [1].OZCAN [2] provides a high-level overview of mobile phones for imaging/microscopy, sensing,medical diagnostics and general measurement science, enabled by the pervasiveness, low cost,connectivity, and increasing performance of mobile phones with CCD cameras and otheraccessories. A few trends noted by OZCAN [2] are analogous to Moore’s Law inmicroelectronics: 1. The yearly increase in pixel count of mobile phone images is exponential, 2.computer processing power of mobile phones is also increasing exponentially, approaching thatof PCs, 3. Mobile phone network speed is increasing and closed to the average speed of internetcommunication rates (bps), and 4. The cost of data transmission ($/Mbit) via mobile
. The modern hacker community grew from the playful and clever,sometimes irreverent, pranksters of “the Old MIT” going back to the ’60s and ’70s. For theseyoung pioneers the information world was their playground, a place which was unnoticed bymost, feared by those who took note, and misunderstood by nearly all. In 1984, US Congresspassed the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act because a Mathew Broderick film scared them - WarGames [1] [2] [3] [4]. As industry and regulation began to encroach on their playground, thehacker community began to push back.Richard Stallman stated that, “A hacker is someone who enjoys playful cleverness, notnecessarily with computers. The programmers in the old MIT free software community of the’60s and ’70s referred to
Melgares, University of Kansas Graduate student at the University of Kansas c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 The Impact of Course Transformation on Student Learning and Success in Fundamental Electrical Engineering/Computer Science CoursesIntroductionStudies repeatedly show improvements in learning, achievement, and success for students afterimplementation of active learning and student-centered teaching practices. Active learningimproves retention of content, achievement level, and success in courses [1, 2]. Research onflipped classrooms in engineering education has shown positive effects including increasedretention, better performance on learning
a comparative understanding of howcurricular knowledge differences arise due to disciplinary differences, which eventually lead todifferences in students’ development of identity in each discipline. Using these three disciplineswill allow us to examine how the process of student engagement with knowledge in puredisciplines (Chemistry and Biochemistry) differs from that in an applied one (ChemicalEngineering). From our preliminary analysis of the first-year data, we show how students’ choicewhat to study relates to their emerging identity.IntroductionGee [1] notes there are four different ways to view identity: nature identity, institution identity,discourse identity, affinity identity. First, nature identity is developed from the
new trend that hasthe potential to shift the future of education [1] through (1) digital, physical and logic tools, (2)community infrastructure and (3) the maker mindset, which is characterized as curious, playful,optimistic, persistent, resourceful and willing to take responsibility, take risks and shareinformation [2, p. 5]. These characteristics are similar to the engineering habits of mind [3]:systems thinking, creativity, optimism, collaboration, communication and attention to technicalconsiderations [4, p. 152].The maker movement also has the potential to respond to the calls for increased exposure in K-12 curriculum to sciences, technology, engineering and math (STEM) and hands-on and designexperiences in college level engineering
previous student team members were analyzed to determine the extent to whichmultidisciplinary composition of the student teams impacted student perceptions of projectsuccess, skills acquired, and overall team environment.To complement the student perspectives, faculty perspectives regarding supportingmultidisciplinary teams in the EPICS program were also collected through a roundtablediscussion. Results of a roundtable and SWOT (Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities, Threats)analysis are included and discussed. This paper reports the results of the student-focused andfaculty-focused analysis of multidisciplinary EPICS teams and plans for further work.1. IntroductionThe Engineering Projects in Community Service Program was started at Purdue University
students.IntroductionGlobalization requires future engineers to live up to the challenges from industryupgrading and development [1],[2]. China, as the largest producer of engineeringgraduates in the world, has been encountering many challenges in the field ofengineering education and undergoing a series of engineering education reforms. Oneof the major problems lies in the oversupply of unqualified engineers and theundersupply of high-quality engineers [2]. Considering the challenges facing Chineseengineering education, the Chinese Ministry of Education (MoE) initiated the “Planfor Educating and Training Outstanding Engineers” (PETOE) in 2010 [3] and the“Emerging Engineering Education” (EEE) plan in 2017 [4]. Both programs target toproduce a large number of high-quality
ready for the workshop, but only a staggering 11% of business leaders feel that graduateshave the competencies and skills necessary to succeed in the workplace [1]. This challenge does notescape engineering programs, and many are developing strategic programs to take on this industryreadiness gap. Some engineering programs have launched industry-sponsored senior capstone programswhile others bring industry influence into the classroom as guests, adjunct faculty or through industry-influenced curriculum or professional socialization [2-5]. Other engineering programs have sought toclose this industry readiness gap with mentorship programs [6-7].Mentorship is a vital component to career advancement. It is stated by the Association for Talent &
, 1986) and individual-driven proactive behaviors (Ashford & Black,1996). Therefore, we operationalized Weidman’s conceptual framework (shown in Figure 1)by integrating these specific mechanisms in order to understand both how the institutionshapes undergraduate socialization (through institutional tactics) and how studentsthemselves take an active role in the socialization process (through proactive behaviors).Scales measuring institutional tactics and proactive behaviors have been used together instudies of organizational behavior (Kim, Cable, & Kim, 2005; Ashforth, Sluss, & Saks,2007) but never in the context of higher education.In this paper, we examine this portion of our model, namely the relationships betweenstudents
to inform pedagogical interventions to foster motivation and thusimprove students’ learning.IntroductionStudents’ motivation has received a lot of attention in the field of Higher Education. Thelearning context, that includes the educational approaches, cultural context, or physical settingin which teaching and learning occur, can influence student motivation, which subsequentlyinfluences students’direction, intensity, persistence, and quality of the learning behaviors [1]–[3].Within higher education, there is an increasing trend towards student-centred methodologies,such as project based learning (PBL). Literature states that PBL actively engages students inthe learning process, leading to, among others, increased intrinsic motivation
, 2003). Secondly, studies indicate self-efficacy as a positive predictor of academicperformance (Bandura, 1997; Schunk, 1991; Bruning, Dempsey, Kauffman, McKim, &Zumbrunn, 2013; Sanders-Reio, Alexander, Reio, & Newman, 2014) as well as long-termachievement (Parker et. al., 2014). Self-efficacy is domain and task specific. The following section specifically discussesself-efficacy in science: 1) the established positive relationship between science self-efficacy andachievement in science; 2) factors that impact science self-efficacy, specifically prior successesand modeling of behaviors in academic settings; and 3) gender differences regarding therelationship between sources of self-efficacy and science self-efficacy.Science Self
design by using a preliminary data analysis.Keywords: logic of design, decision making, design philosophy1 IntroductionDesign and engineering of technological artifacts are the core functions of modern corporationsthat are situated in an increasingly international network of production, distribution, and exchange.It is well established in Science and Technology Studies (STS) 1 or history and philosophy of tech-nology 2,3 that social and political intentions as well as technical and instrumental necessities deter-mine the outcome of design and engineering decisions. Industrial and technological corporationsare establishments with financial, political, and moral roadmaps that among other entities such asresearch universities, national labs, or
military veterans make up small fraction of U.S. college undergraduates and only 1 in 5enrolled veterans pursue a STEM-related degree.While STEM education research with SVSM continues to grow, much about the collegeexperiences of SVSM remains unclear. Moreover, scholars point to unique challenges andlimitations associated with conducting SVSM research that hinder deeper understandings ofSVSM experience in higher education. Challenges include identifying and gaining access toSVSM participants, interpreting SVSM data without the insights afforded by personal militaryexperience, and unpacking SVSM experiences that often exist at the intersection of multipleidentities underserved in STEM (i.e., gender, nontraditional, first generation
high-profile incidents related tobuilding, transportation, manufacturing, and bioethics scandals.[1]–[4] This has resulted in aperception that Chinese companies and industries are problematically unsafe and potentiallyunethical. Central to these concerns would be the education of engineers.1In addition to the record number of Chinese students studying abroad [5], Chinese institutions oftertiary education now graduate more STEM majors than any other country in the world.[6], [7]China became a member of the Washington Accord in 2016 [8], requiring that engineeringgraduates achieve “Comprehension of the role of engineering in society and identif[y] issues inengineering practice in the discipline: ethics and the professional responsibility of an
iscritical to the nation’s economy. However, the industry faces increasing difficulty finding skilledworkers to fulfill their workforce needs. It is estimated that within the next decade there will be3.5 million available manufacturing jobs and of those, at least 2 million will go unfilled [1].Currently, up to 89% of manufacturers cannot find skilled workers to fill open job positions [2].One potential cause of this skills gap is thought to be the poor perceptions of manufacturingcareers held by the general public. A Deloitte study showed that while a majority of American’shave positive perceptions about the future workforce in manufacturing, less than 50% believemanufacturing to be a rewarding career and one-third would not encourage their children
[1]. Society demands engineers capable of co-creatinga sustainable society. The need to integrate sustainable development as a red thread throughall education has existed for a long time, and with the formation of the 17 sustainabilitydevelopment goals (SDGs) [2] in combination with the contemporary climate debate, thisneed is even more obvious regarding engineering education in 2030 than it is now.In addition to the challenge of sustainability, another challenge is posed by the industrydemand for engineers who are experienced in project management and who have the ability tolearn and adapt quickly, given that career paths will change more rapidly in the near future[3], [4], [1]. Therefore, these future requirements for employability
and Tapping) in High School Science ClassroomsAbstractShop classes where students use tools to fashion useful and functional objects from metal, wood,plastic, and other materials are disappearing from most American high schools in favor of moretheoretical subjects. Multiple factors contribute to this transition including 1) cost to maintainshops, 2) liability concerns, 3) focus on exam-driven standards-based testing, 4) and curriculumrealignment for improved college admissions. There is interest in re-introducing elements ofshop class back into high schools enabling students to learn by doing and to become more awareof how things are made.Borrowing upon foundational Energy Engineering Laboratory Module (EELM™) pedagogy
of Student Performance in Chemistry-based Courses in Public Universities Using University Matriculation Entrance Scores in ChemistryIntroductionIn Nigeria, since independence, access to university education has grown significantly. Initially,each university conducted its entrance examination and selected its own candidates based solelyon merit [1]. This individual university admission exercise was not satisfactory as it created toomuch room for wastage of admission slots through multiple offers to one candidate whiledepriving others of placement slots into the universities of their choice [2]. As the number ofuniversities increased marginally, this marked the genesis of centralized and coordinateduniversity admission system that led to the
development literature indicates that faculty members whoreceive adequate mentoring are more productive leading to greater overall objective careersuccess. Minimal research in engineering education has investigated the impact of facultydevelopment and mentoring programs despite these findings. Evaluating faculty developmentand mentoring programs can elicit information that can help inform the development of anevidenced-based approach to designing such programs. The Engineering Faculty ImpactCollaborative (EFIC) seeks to address this need by building a collaborative among institutionsand faculty that will: (1) instigate broad interest in and awareness of entrepreneurial mindset(EM)-based engineering faculty mentorship and development, (2) contribute
describes the outcomes of a successful program development and approvalprocess and the planned phasing of its implementation. The development team treated the1 Corresponding Author: M. Dyrenfurth, mdyrenfu@purdue.eduexisting program approval mechanisms, as found in most universities and states, as a staged-gate approval process. This necessitated the development of (1) a conceptual proposal, (2) acompetitive analysis, (3) a detailed program plan, (4) an implementation plan, and (5) aformal proposal with supporting data as required by the state coordinating body for highereducation.The program that evolved from this process was an industry-facing, distance/on-campus-hybrid professional doctoral program permitting extensive tailoring of the
liberal-arts education provides unique opportunities [1] to integrateinterventions within the curriculum. Cognitive approaches such as design and innovative thinkingcan be integrated into the curriculum and can be implemented through active learning and humancentered design methodologies. We incorporated these methodologies into our curricula to preparestudents to address the ever changing and complex environmental challenges that affect society[2]. Traditional lecture-based learning does not provide adequate preparations for students toutilize their learning and apply their knowledge in various real-life scenarios outside of theclassroom. Problem based learning provides a novel teaching and learning model where studentsinteract with concepts and
Engineering Education. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2019 Project REAP: Reaping the Benefits of High-stakes Assessment Frequency Boosters1. Introduction To help starting engineering students in properly preparing for their engineering careers,introductory engineering textbooks advise them to devote a minimum of two to three hours ofstudy for every lecture-hour they attend [1]. In such textbooks, the point is often made that inhigh school most learning takes place in the classroom, whereas in college most learning takesplace outside the classroom. This important point correlates with other studies based on cognitivepsychology, which point out that the